58 elections, arguing that the suspension fell within the competence of the National Assembly.112 124(64) As a result of a complaint filed by Brooklyn Rivera Bryan on August 24, 2000, the Ombudsman’s Office asked the Supreme Electoral Council to provide “a detailed report of the reasons for the facts reported in the complaint.” The Supreme Electoral Council did not allow the Ombudsman’s Office to inspect the “Ledger of Resolutions which contained the resolution that the Council had taken unanimously” on August 15, 2000 (supra para. 124(51)), because, according to an official of this Council, “the ledger was locked up and [the] only [person] who has the key [...] had died.”113 124(65) On March 3, 2005, the Ombudsman’s Office issued a final decision with regard to this complaint filed by Brooklyn Rivera Bryan (supra para. 124(64), in which it declared that the Supreme Electoral Council and the Supreme Court of Justice “have violated civil and political rights, in the form of the right to equality before the law, the right not to be subjected to discrimination, the right to take part in government, to elect and to be elected, the right to respect for their cultural identity and also the right to judicial protection of the candidates for mayor, deputy mayor, councilors, and the population in general of the Autonomous Regions of the North and South Atlantic.”114 CONCERNING THE MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS OF NOVEMBER 5, 2000 124(66) On November 5, 2000, the first municipal elections under Electoral Act No. 331 of 2000, were held in keeping with the electoral calendar of the Supreme Electoral Council (supra para. 124(29)).115 124(67) The YATAMA party did not take part in the elections of November 5, 2000, owing to the resolution of the Supreme Electoral Council of August 15, 2000 (supra para. 124(51)). This caused tension that had repercussions on the national and international scene.116 There were confrontations with the police, protests and arrests of protesters who questioned this decision.117 Democracy, Americas Series, No. 27, General Secretariat of the Organization of American States (file of appendixes to the application, tome II, appendix 19, folio 650); and newspaper Article entitled “Procurador de D.H. aconseja suspender elecciones en la RAAN. CSE no debe medir fuerzas con YATAMA”, published in “El Nuevo Diario” on November 3, 2000 (file of appendixes to the application, tome II, appendix 22, folio 808). 112 Cf. newspaper Article entitled “CSE persiste en jugar con fuego. Mantienen elecciones sin YATAMA”, published in “El Nuevo Diario” on November 4, 2000 (file of appendixes to the application, tome II, appendix 22, folio 816); and Second Report. The Carter Center Mission to Evaluate Electoral Conditions in Nicaragua, November 1-8, 2000 (file of appendixes to the application, tome II, appendix 20, folio 731). 113 Cf. resolution of March 3, 2005, issued by the Ombudsman’s Office (file of preliminary objections, merits and reparations, tome IV, folio 985); and newspaper Article entitled “Procurador de D.H. aconseja suspender elecciones en la RAAN. CSE no debe medir fuerzas con YATAMA”, published in “El Nuevo Diario” on November 3, 2000 (file of appendixes to the application, tome II, appendix 22, folio 808). 114 Cf. resolution of March 3, 2005, issued by the Ombudsman’s Office (file of preliminary objections, merits and reparations, tome IV, folio 992). 115 Cf. Electoral Observation in Nicaragua: 2000 Municipal Elections/Unit for the Promotion of Democracy, Americas Series, No. 27, General Secretariat of the Organization of American States (file of appendixes to the application, tome II, appendix 19, folio 620). 116 Cf. Electoral Observation in Nicaragua: 2000 Municipal Elections/Unit for the Promotion of Democracy, Americas Series, No. 27, General Secretariat of the Organization of American States, and